Guest Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 43 minutes ago, Mlle. Zabzie said: I had a long conversation with my mother about this. She's lived in VA since 1970, and grew up in Tennessee. She's shaken. As she put it, she has known for at least her whole adult life that blackface is wrong. She's pretty sure her parents would have identified it as wrong, so it's baffling to her that someone in the 1980s thought it was ok. And she said that she couldn't think of anyone ever in her social circle who ever had or would have worn blackface (and as she put it, she didn't grow up that differently than these guys, except she's older). EXCEPT, now she's wondering whether she was completely naive and a greater proportion of people she thought simply shared her base values do not or did not at all. She's really struggling. Also, she said about VA "it's a dumpster fire - fun to watch but don't get downwind." Further, she said, the fact that #4 in line was as a result of a name pulled out of a bowl is disgraceful. Also, she's not exactly liberal, so this is sort of interesting to watch. Just to be clear, my last paragraph was about 95% sarcasm and 5% "just what the hell is going on with Democratic leaders in Virginia?!?!" I can understand some of your mother's bewilderment, as I've recently been dealing with a somewhat similar situation, albeit on a much smaller scale, with things I've discovered about the elementary school district I attended growing up. For a long time I had thought it was a fairly progressive and diverse school, for suburban city Oklahoma standards at least, because there were a lot of students whose parents emigrated from Middle-Eastern and/or Southeast Asian countries, and I was lucky to be exposed to a lot of different cultures growing up as I was friends with nearly all of them. Then I found out that was just an happy accident, and realized that there were never any Latino or African-American students there whole ten years I attended that school, and that this school had been founded specifically for that purpose. It has been something of a shock to the system to say the least. On an unrelated note, would you mind if I sent you a PM later today to talk some shop and pick your brain a bit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted February 7, 2019 Author Share Posted February 7, 2019 17 minutes ago, Cas Stark said: It only makes the hypocrisy worse then, that everyone viewed her as a white woman, but still kept listing her as Native American and a minority in various registries in order to increase their diversity quotient, and of course, it is unprovable whether she received any advantage or not. It doesn't make sense to me, given the decades long push in academia to diversify their faculty, that a self identified Native American wouldn't have been an advantage. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/after-new-document-is-revealed-warren-struggles-with-questions-of-identity/2019/02/06/bf380538-2a24-11e9-b011-d8500644dc98_story.html?utm_term=.a0adb78a5922 More Republican bull. Quote Harvard University's decision to hire Elizabeth Warren as a law professor in the 1990s was not based on any assertion that she has Native American heritage, according to a report by the Boston Globe. The newspaper reports that interviews and documents show the issue was not considered by Harvard Law faculty or those who admitted the now U.S. senator from Massachusetts to law school at Rutgers or to jobs at The University of Houston, The University of Texas, and the University of Pennsylvania. https://www.wbur.org/news/2018/09/02/elizabeth-warren-ethnicity-harvard Just keep ignoring facts and what's on the record and insinuate, insinuate, insinuate. And you wonder why the Republicans not only didn't add women to Congress, they lost women. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 1 minute ago, Fragile Bird said: More REpublican bull. https://www.wbur.org/news/2018/09/02/elizabeth-warren-ethnicity-harvard Just keep ignoring facts and what;s on the record and insinuate, insinuate, insinuate. And you wonder why the Republicans not only didn't add women to Congress, they lost women. I'll just add that while I'm not very happy with the way Warren has handled this issue, if it comes down between voting for her and a Republican, let's just say I won't be voting Republican during this lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S John Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 34 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said: Ormond, I absolutely agree with you! Warren’s pride in her ancestry should not have resulted in her claiming to be Native American when she obviously is not, and I should have made that clear. But I don’t see it as having been devious or intentionally misleading in the way saying you were from Sweden was, because you were actually trying to fool people. Trump now admits his ancestry is German and everything is ok, Warren has now apologized for using Native American but now she’s unfit to be president. It’s just so damn galling, like almost everything associated with Trump. The picture is clouded, of course, by accusations she did it to gain an advantage. I think she did it because she had some kind of romantic pride about the idea of a connection, simply because I have met people who told me about their family ancestral stories with the same kind of I think there’s a difference between saying you are Swedish when you are German vs. saying you are Native American when you are white. At least in this race obsessed country where Swedish and German would both be considered ‘European White’ or something similar on any kind of official document. I’ve posted about this before but Warren being proud of a Native American ancestor is one thing, and there is nothing wrong with that, but claiming to BE Native American on official documents, repeatedly? It’s lying, plain and simple. And I really don’t think it’s out of the realm of possibility that she benefited from this lying even as everyone involved claims they didn’t even consider that sort of thing. In this country? Yea, right. I think it’s gross, honestly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cas Stark Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 It is a fact that she listed herself or was listed as a Native American and a minority in multiple directories over many years, this is not Republican 'bull' but a fact that is outlined in the Wash Post article. It is a fact that she she says and Harvard says that this "ancestry" played no role in her getting hired. Whether a person believes this is true or false probably depends on where they fall in the political spectrum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 2 minutes ago, Cas Stark said: It is a fact that she listed herself or was listed as a Native American and a minority in multiple directories over many years, this is not Republican 'bull' but a fact that is outlined in the Wash Post article. It is a fact that she she says and Harvard says that this "ancestry" played no role in her getting hired. Whether a person believes this is true or false probably depends on where they fall in the political spectrum. Just for the sake of argument, let's say I believe that it did in fact play a role. And supposing she becomes the Democratic nominee for President, Does that mean I should go out and vote for Trump? Yeah, I don't think so. Trump is still a bigger clown and it's not even close. And just to be clear, I think she badly botched this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S John Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 2 minutes ago, Cas Stark said: It is a fact that she listed herself or was listed as a Native American and a minority in multiple directories over many years, this is not Republican 'bull' but a fact that is outlined in the Wash Post article. It is a fact that she she says and Harvard says that this "ancestry" played no role in her getting hired. Whether a person believes this is true or false probably depends on where they fall in the political spectrum. Even if she is not directly benefiting you have to ask, why are these organizations collecting demographic information? Probably because they want to get an idea of what their diversity numbers are, and this might help them inform hiring, admissions, etc down the road. By falsely listing that you are a minority you are skewing those numbers and making the situation seem more diverse than it is. Even if the impact of one individual doing this is minuscule, it still contributes to painting a false picture of the actual Native American representation at the institution. I mean, I’ll vote for Warren over Trump, but I think if that is our choice Trump will win again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cas Stark Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 1 minute ago, OldGimletEye said: Just for the sake of argument, let's say I believe that it did in fact play a role. And supposing she becomes the Democratic nominee for President, Does that mean I should go out and vote for Trump? Yeah, I don't think so. Trump is still a bigger clown and it's not even close. And just to be clear, I think she badly botched this issue. It doesn't really have anything to do with Trump as far as I can see. The issue of whether or not she received career advantages by claiming to be a Native American precedes Trump by many years, and it has to do with her honesty, not her politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 1 minute ago, S John said: I mean, I’ll vote for Warren over Trump, but I think if that is our choice Trump will win again. While I agree with on a lot of policy details, I do think this is an issue that will continue to nag her and its probably wise she doesn't run against Trump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cas Stark Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 2 minutes ago, S John said: Even if she is not directly benefiting you have to ask, why are these organizations collecting demographic information? Probably because they want to get an idea of what their diversity numbers are, and this might help them inform hiring, admissions, etc down the road. By falsely listing that you are a minority you are skewing those numbers and making the situation seem more diverse than it is. Even if the impact of one individual doing this is minuscule, it still contributes to painting a false picture of the actual Native American representation at the institution. I mean, I’ll vote for Warren over Trump, but I think if that is our choice Trump will win again. I would be surprised if she gets the nomination, she has some of the same negatives as Hillary Clinton did, she is not hugely 'likeable' and has some self inflicted wounds as well as questions about her honesty and authenticity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 8 minutes ago, Cas Stark said: and it has to do with her honesty, not her politics. From which we should conclude what? Republicans have been right all along on financial issues? Yeah, I don't think so, if that is where you want to go with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueMetis Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 Just now, S John said: Even if she is not directly benefiting you have to ask, why are these organizations collecting demographic information? Probably because they want to get an idea of what their diversity numbers are, and this might help them inform hiring, admissions, etc down the road. By falsely listing that you are a minority you are skewing those numbers and making the situation seem more diverse than it is. Even if the impact of one individual doing this is minuscule, it still contributes to painting a false picture of the actual Native American representation at the institution. I mean, I’ll vote for Warren over Trump, but I think if that is our choice Trump will win again. Sort of depends on how the question is asked doesn't it? All the questionnaires of that type I've ever seen have been a "select all the apply" deal. Do American's really expect people to identify with only one ethnicity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 1 hour ago, Mlle. Zabzie said: I had a long conversation with my mother about this. She's lived in VA since 1970, and grew up in Tennessee. She's shaken. As she put it, she has known for at least her whole adult life that blackface is wrong. She's pretty sure her parents would have identified it as wrong, so it's baffling to her that someone in the 1980s thought it was ok. And she said that she couldn't think of anyone ever in her social circle who ever had or would have worn blackface (and as she put it, she didn't grow up that differently than these guys, except she's older). EXCEPT, now she's wondering whether she was completely naive and a greater proportion of people she thought simply shared her base values do not or did not at all. She's really struggling. Also, she said about VA "it's a dumpster fire - fun to watch but don't get downwind." Further, she said, the fact that #4 in line was as a result of a name pulled out of a bowl is disgraceful. Also, she's not exactly liberal, so this is sort of interesting to watch. We have modern examples of this: Mexican themed frat parties. They were quite common up until recently when campuses started cracking down on them. I was an elected member to my university’s student government, and we had to revoke a frat’s party privileges for a semester over this. They were genuinely sorry, but it was clear that they had no idea that what they did was extremely offensive to the Hispanic members of our student body. I’m guessing that’s what happened with Northam and the AG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cas Stark Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 3 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said: From which we should conclude what? Me, I concluded long ago that she was a liar, a hypocrite, a self promoter selling a destructive brand of outrage. I suspect you would come to a different conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cas Stark Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 5 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: We have modern examples of this: Mexican themed frat parties. They were quite common up until recently when campuses started cracking down on them. I was an elected member to my university’s student government, and we had to revoke a frat’s party privileges for a semester over this. They were genuinely sorry, but it was clear that they had no idea that what they did was extremely offensive to the Hispanic members of our student body. I’m guessing that’s what happened with Northam and the AG. So you punished people for something they 'had no idea' was offensive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said: Foolish. Can you instead, cleverly, provide a search term? as whomever it may or may not have been? especially as I'm not the only one who cannot recall what the forum handle was, if indeed there was someone here who did or did not work for her. These things don't much register. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Kilmore Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 2 minutes ago, Zorral said: Not clever. Can you instead, cleverly, provide a search term? as whomever it may or may not have been? especially as I'm not the only one who cannot recall what the forum handle was, if indeed there was someone here who did or did not work for her. These things don't much register. He was saying it was him that worked with Klobuchar or is at least familiar with her campaign staff. Tywin is the one. Hi Gogo is the name of the clip, referencing the character from Kill Bill, who is waving and saying "Hi". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse Named Stranger Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 Just now, Cas Stark said: So you punished people for something they 'had no idea' was offensive? Your point being? Something is only wrong (punishable), when you yourself acknowledge it as wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cas Stark Posted February 7, 2019 Share Posted February 7, 2019 Just now, A Horse Named Stranger said: Your point being? Something is only wrong (punishable), when you yourself acknowledge it as wrong? He didn't say they refused to acknowledge it was wrong, but that they legitimately did not intend or know their actions would cause offense. My point is that punishing people for actions that are done in good faith because somebody somewhere is offended is puritanical, unAmerican and if this country had not lost its mind normal, reasonable people would be offended by the mere idea of doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragile Bird Posted February 7, 2019 Author Share Posted February 7, 2019 31 minutes ago, Cas Stark said: It is a fact that she listed herself or was listed as a Native American and a minority in multiple directories over many years, this is not Republican 'bull' but a fact that is outlined in the Wash Post article. It is a fact that she she says and Harvard says that this "ancestry" played no role in her getting hired. Whether a person believes this is true or false probably depends on where they fall in the political spectrum. Elizabeth Warren is a woman and she got a job at Harvard. Live with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.